MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170751489 · doi:10.1109/tro.2004.840906

Haptic rendering of rigid contacts using impulsive and penalty forces

2005· article· en· W2170751489 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact forceHaptic technologyRigidity (electromagnetism)StiffnessControl theory (sociology)SimulationComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)CollisionVirtual realityClassical mechanicsEngineeringPhysicsStructural engineeringComputer visionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new simulation approach is proposed to improve the stability and the perceived rigidity of contacts during haptic interaction with multirigid body virtual environments. The approach computes impulsive forces upon contact and penalty and friction forces during contact. The impulsive forces are derived using a new multiple collision resolution method that never increases the kinetic energy of the system. When new contacts arise, the impulsive forces generate large hand accelerations without requiring increased contact stiffness and damping. Virtual objects and linkages are regarded as points in the configuration space, and no distinction is made between them in the proposed approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it